Canon EOS RP review

Intro

The Canon EOS RP is among the smallest and lightest full-frame cameras on the market, and is the least expensive full-frame camera at launch, ever. And though its specifications aren't going to set the world on fire, the RP is a likable little camera with solid JPEG image quality that will be a fine photographic companion for casual users and those already within the Canon ecosystem looking for a compact second body.

Key specifications:

26.2MP Dual Pixel CMOS sensor

4K/24p (from 1.7x crop region)

4 fps continuous shooting with continuous AF (5 without)

Pupil detection AF in continous/Servo AF mode

AF rated to -5EV (with an F1.2 lens)

Digic 8 processor

2.36M dot OLED viewfinder

Fully-articulated 1.04M dot touchscreen

Twin command dials

CIPA rated to 250 shots per charge

Accounting for inflation, the EOS RP (body-only) is priced within $75 of the original 6MP Canon Digital Rebel / EOS 300D that was released back in 2003 - a camera that really helped bring large-sensor digital photography to the masses. And like the Digital Rebel, the EOS RP promises to offer a bit of a stripped-down shooting experience in exchange for its large full-frame image sensor at a reasonable cost. It's worth noting, however, that the earlier Rebel debuted with a range of relatively low-cost lenses designed for it - not so much the case today.

While other manufacturers are moving ever further up-market with more expensive and capable devices, the EOS RP stands alone in providing more novice or budget-constrained users with access to the shallower depth-of-field that full frame cameras offer over those with APS-C or smaller sensors. There are caveats, though, in that the RP is a poor choice for those looking to shoot video, and the native lens selection is lacking at this time.

The EOS RP is available now at a price of $1299 body-only, $1999 with the EF adapter and a 24-105mm F3.5-5.6 lens, and $2399 with the native RF 24-105mm F4L lens.

What's new and how it compares

The EOS RP has a lot of ingredients we've seen in other Canon cameras before, but certainly not at this price point.

It's hard for me to justify the existence of a camera like the RP designed around a price per feature marketing scheme. In fact, I consider the R and RP as marketing stunts, not cameras.Basically in 2019 all cameras should be at the level of the A7III or Z6, they may not be as fast or as capable but all the boxes should be checked at this point.Something is off when a company has to spend money in R&D to delete features in order to meet the price.

If you had said "It's hard for me to justify the purchase of a camera like the RP", then your comment would have made somewhat more sense, but "justify the existence"?

Every single manufacturer design their cameras to meet a specified cost, and they all pick and mix the features they think are appropriate for the target market. Olympus puts PDAF in the E-M1, but not in the E-M5 or E-M10. Fujifilm puts IBIS in the X-H1, but not in the X-T series. Sony puts IBIS in the A6500, but not in the A6400, and so on. They all do it.

Revenant, if canon was making laptops the lowest priced model would not allow you to connect via wifi, or would be missing the "w" from the keyboard, or would not let you install excel, but come with word pre-installed. Somehow because these are cameras, they are able to do stupid sh*t like having a USB-C port that works at USB-2 speeds and get away with it.

The Canon EOS RP is a strange one. On the specification sheet, it's nothing special. In actual usage, it's pretty decent. However, Canon really need to get the inexpensive RF glass out. The RP's balance is ruined easily with the adapter.

I think the largest drawback would be the dynamic range at ISO 100. However, many people I've come across wanting this camera don't photograph scenarios in which a high dynamic range is needed. In fact, they tend to shoot at ISO 400, and up, since they're indoors so often, and the RP's sensor is up to snuff there.

Finally a great, cheap little real CAMERA from Canon and not a full of junky menus camcorder. Gorgeous JPEGs , goid high ISO performance (I honesty don’t know who needs iso over 6400 anyways ) , real dials, tins of used DSLR lenses can be adapted and reasonable pricing that will go down soon.

Seems like a decent camera for the price if you are comfortable with the limitations. However, I only have 2 EF lenses, very elderly L telephotos. If I had a collection of EF lenses I would be interested; I have no interest in purchasing FF lenses of quality. Why? Large, expensive. I have been down sizing to smaller and lighter: M5, M lenses, rare use of EFS adapter and EFS lenses. I have even been dabbling with Olympus M4/3. I find that the M and Oly can make 13 x 19 prints that look great, so why carry more, at least for me. Of course, your needs may be different.

Thank you for mentioning the enjoyment factor. Too often reviews and the subsequent discussions of gear are written as if by a robot; just specs and tech details, etc. Nothing wrong with that per se, but really for the vast majority it's all about the enjoyment of photography.

All of the gear is so capable these days my advice to anyone is to choose the gear you enjoy using the most. You'll be happier, and because you enjoy it more, you will use it more and develop more as a photographer.

Thoughts - Yeah, I think we all get stressed out too much thinking about how a new bit of gear will get us better photos, when the truth is that we are often better off just keeping what we've got, learning to use it properly, and enjoying ourselves.

I'm as guilty as anyone, and I guess none of us (apart from the trolls) would be here if we weren't gear-heads.

Ryan - I think you're being a bit unrealistic if you're hoping for a newly released FF MILC for $1000. Sony can only sell the old a7 series bodies cheap because they've already covered all the tooling and design costs.

Canon have probably kept the price of this as low as they possibly could.

I doubt if they'll make much money out of it at this price - they'll be relying mainly on using the camera to get newcomers into the Canon system, get them buying lenses, and possibly upgrading later to another body, thereby retaining them as long-term customers.

armandido - Yes. There is a lot of old tech in the camera, and Canon undoubtedly had a bin full of bits that they needed to shift, but the basic camera is completely new, and the costs of designing, tooling etc aren't exactly cheap.

If you want a comparison, compare the cost at launch, of a Sony a7ii, which used most of the bits from the earlier a7, and has much more in common with it's predecessor than the RP has with either the 6DMkii or the EOS-R. Launching a new model costs money.

In real world terms, for a new model of FF MILC, regardless of the use of the 6DMkii sensor, $1300 is extremely cheap for a launch price. Obviously that price will drop in a few months, as does the price of almost all cameras.

@entomanThis camera body is not bigger or more expensive to make than far cheaper cameras coming brand new to the market. As mirrorless does not even have a pentaprism and mirror box. I am not sure I agree with you on this one. In absolute terms $1,300 is not exactly cheap in my opinion and it goes against a slew of new and used ff cameras often far more capable, trying to win a segment that has dried out.

$1300 is exactly the amount Canon analysts believe they can squeeze out of early adopters. If they are wrong or when the market is saturated, the price will fall. In Europe the price is much higher at 1500 Euro and you do not get the grip for free like in the US. No way I would pay more than 1000 Euro for this camera but that is about the deal you get in the US, if you calculate a free adapter and grip in.

Entoman I agree it is a good price for the camera, but with competition with A7II and the M50 being 649 now, makes it a tougher option. A person would really need to have the full frame sensor. With it’s awful battery, and barely usable 4K. It makes it harder for people to want.

The M50 is a great camera too, but it’s price dropped 200 within a couple months. It was a highly likable camera too.

Ryan - Canon *always* launch their cameras at higher prices than equivalent models from other brands, and as happened in your case of the M50, market forces lead to a more realistic price within a fairly short period.

By launching at product at a high price, and then allowing market forces to determine its real value, Canon are attempting to create an illusion that the buyers who wait a couple of months (as most people do) are getting a bargain. It's all part of Canon's highly succcessful marketing strategy.

Tried it last week at the local store : I had quite a nice impression.

It feels good in hand (better than the Z6, and for my tiny hands, as good as the A7II I have), light, small enough. I didn't like the on/off button on the right, though. It requires you to wait for the camera to be in both hands to power it on, so more time before you can get your shot.

I didn't feel the menus were that easy to navigate as a non-Canon user, but I just loved the touched screen!

Actually, I think this LCD screen that you can tilt all the ways you want is the best feature of this camera. I could see perfectly how it could help get better photos, in more creative positions. That with a very good touchscreen makes it miles ahead of the A7II, really. And the AF also looked way better.

I'll probably get the A7III this year or next year, but if I were to start all over again, I think I'd fall for Canon and this one.

I think that the user experience with the RP is really nice as well. I still cannot believe that Canon is the only camera maker putting the fully articulating screen on their full frame cameras. I know that it isn't a feature that everyone wants but, damn, it's really nice...

For me, if I were to go into mirrorless, I'd still stick to Nikon since glass isn't cheap to swap out, and I really like the Z cameras. However, I think that Canon is moving swiftly enough to where such thoughts can be swayed in a couple of years.

This variangle screen is the exact reason that I will not buy another Canon ever again. I have no use for this cumbersome and slow device that blows my camera to twice its size when extended. What about „discrete shooting“?

If I would do video I would probably love this screen but I don’t. I take pictures. But I fear that video will be the reason for more and more cameras to have the variangle screens.

Doubling the camera size is quite the hyperbole. And what is it with people wanting to be super-incognito when photographing things? Seems rather voyeuristic... And it's not like having the screen flip out to the side is going set an alarm off over your head, and expose you.

bottom of page 3, ISO and connectivity : “and an option to have the camera choose that minimum shutter speed automatically. If you choose the last option, you can bias it either faster or slower than the default option, which is 1/shutter speed.”

I really like the comparison with the original digital rebel, the rebel had almost 20 years of autofocus lenses hanging around that were perfect for it's 6MP APSC sensor and the rebel had zero competition at it's price - those were big advantages, it also had enormous disadvantages, the body felt like a child's toy, at 6MP the resolution really wasn't better than film, it's autofocus did suck, it had no raw, it's viewfinder was as bad a vewfinder as Canon has put on a camera with an interchangeable lens mount.

I think Canon has taken the right approach with the as small and cheap as possible RP. I'm hoping that a year from now Canon introduces the rebel xt version of the RP (with way more features like IBIS ) at an even lower price.

But wouldn't you compare it to not buying a separate camera? Or the m, which is going to take pictures just as good for most people. Just because it has a certain size sensor doesn't make it a good value.

I haven't held one but it looks rather Canon-DSLR-y, comfortable to hold, and yet not very large. This preview reinforces that. In comparison the Z6 gets much maligned for its "uneven" "imbalanced" "geek!" looks but I've only seen minor complaints on how it handles.

I have neither compliments nor harsh words for how my A7rii handles but I do have compliments for its IQ .. used it is a rather good buy now if you needn't lightning AF or writes to a mem card, esp. in countries where the A7iii isn't a 1999USD camera.

The RP feels very nice but your pinky dangles under the base plate and there are a couple of handling quirks if you are a left-eye user. With the Canon adaptor and the 24-105mm EF, or the 100mm macro, it handles well. With anything physically longer or heavier, just forget it.

The Z6 handles extremely well with native Z lenses. All the controls are easy to operate even for left-eye users. I haven't tried it with FX lenses via the Nikon adaptor, but it looks a bit clumsy and uncomfortable to hold when using the adaptor.

Sony a7Riii has all the controls nicely placed but, for me, it just feels uncomfortable to hold, and my fingers get pinched between the grip and the lens. Apart from that, excellent.

As far as styling and ergonomics are concerned, I prefer Canon and Nikon. I haven't seen or handled the Panasonic S1R yet, but it looks promising ergonomically.

I handled both back to back yesterday. The Canon felt better in hand (it's less rugged body seemed to have a nicer texture, if that makes any sense) and I felt the controls were laid out a a little better as well. The Sony is clearly much better built, and by specs, is arguably the better overall camera, but it comes down to what set of specs works best for you.

I do like the idea that a larger sensor would allow more of a safety zone when shooting higher ISO's, and there are times I think it would be nice to have a D500 or D5 for shooting swimming or theater, but for me that would be complete overkill, and I've never had an issue accomplishing what I needed with my small m43 system, and have therefore managed to avoid the curse of GAS.

So for those of you that can use the specs of the RP, have a ton of fun with the camera!

@entoman "Sony a7Riii has all the controls nicely placed but, for me, it just feels uncomfortable to hold, and my fingers get pinched between the grip and the lens. Apart from that, excellent."

I know a couple of wedding photographers that couldn't go to the A7III for this reason. They wanted the eye-AF; they wanted the benefits of the EVF. But, after renting at the A7III with the 24-70 GM, they couldn't do it. Their large hands were being harmed by the setup as their fingers were constantly rubbing up against the lens.

Yes, ouch me A7. I wonder if the Z cameras are the same when bigger lenses appear. They don’t have much more room for the fingers but maybe the lenses extend less? The Canon R was a pleasure in that regard. Greatest grip of all and no pain.

"The specs do hint that the once higher-priced a7 II was a more ambitious camera than the EOS RP, but that just shows the limitations of spec-based comparisons: they can't tell you what a camera is like to *use*."

"though its specifications aren't going to set the world on fire, the RP is a likable little camera with solid JPEG image quality that will be a fine photographic companion for casual users"

There really is no fear. Just interest in what Canon is finally coming up with after years of rumors and not much else... Also interested to see what all the Canon fanboys are saying after poo-pooing mirrorless for 5 years.

The Sony crowd is NO WAY in fear of this camera or anything else about the R mount.

I don't think anyone from either camp "fears" the competition, but a lot of people, regardless of whether they use Canon, Nikon, Sony or M43, feel the need to justify their own purchase decisions and belittle people who, for very good reasons, make different decisions.

Lots of people make little digs at each other, and most of it is just harmless banter. Some of it however can make quite unpleasant reading.

Thorgram, a lot of Sony users still have stockpiles of Canon lenses. Many are prepared to put them to use on a worthwhile new Canon body. When they see that the R/RP are not that, they say it like it is. It is as simple as that. Why is it so hard to fathom?

Mike - I'll be following it closely. Animal eye-AF would be a potentially huge advantage for wildlife photography. My guess is that the first iteration of the firmware will be OK for domestic cats and dogs, but not for wildlife. But it's a very promising direction.

You forget that a huge chunk of Sony mirrorless users are former Canon users. Where do you think all these Sony users are coming from? Who do you think is buying all these Sony mirrorless bodies? Most of these sales are going to former users of Canon and Nikon. We weren't born Sony users, lol. Most of us came from other systems. For example, I'm a former Canon DSLR user. But clearly, Canon has dragged their feet in the mirrorless era, which led us to migrate to more competent, more developed systems that are showing more promise and better technology. We aren't married to a brand like some people. We tend to be more objective, not blinded by brand idolatry.

Entoman, FYI animal EyeAF comes in June. The release next week includes the “real-time tracking” you’ve probably seen all the videos for but NOT animal EyeAF. (This is as originally communicated by Sony. But missed by many. animal EyeAF is in FW6.0 in June, per Sony’s announcement.)

Losing sleep over a Canon that put out a "cheap" FF mirrorless camera that is still more expensive than comparable FF bodies from Sony? Losing sleep over a Canon that released a "cheap" FF mirrorless camera but forgot to make an inexpensive kit lens to go with it? Really? If anything, this kind of stuff makes Canon users like me really annoyed because Canon always seems to find a way to try our patience, screw us over with unnecessary crippling, or just dropping the ball.

T3 - We disagree on some things but I'm with you there. I use Canon gear, and it's incredibly frustrating to always be offered a camera that does "just enough", while Nikon and Sony leap ahead in terms of technology, and more importantly in terms of performance and image quality.

Sadly I don't think Canon will ever change this policy, bacause in terms of sales and profit, it works extremely well. People upgrade more frequently, just to get that little bit extra, but we never actually get what we want or what we need.

I've stayed with Canon for 8 years, but as every day passes, I get closer to jumping ship.

RubberDials - I photograph all types of wildlife, in fact almost anything to do with the natural world.

I'm thinking about a9 for wild animals, birds in flight, and occasions when I need really fast burst speeds. The a7Riii would be my macro and landscape camera, where I don't need the AF tracking but I do need high MP and lots of sharpness.

For macro I rarely use live-view or manual focusing, simply because insects are rarely stationary. My current approach is to stalk the insect using the OVF, using MF override to pre-set the approximate scale and focus distance. The fine tuning is done in AF, which keeps up with the small to and fro movement that is inevitable when hand holding macro.

My 5DS and 5DMkiv have no problem focusing instantly on spider eyes, but it's very difficult on an OVF to judge depth of field, or to tell which bits of the subject are critically sharp (e.g. the eyes might be sharp on a butterfly, but the wing tips have to be sharp at the same time). I figure that focus peaking and other mirrorless focus aids might improve my hit rate.

Mike - Yes, I should try to be a real photographer, shooting on slide film, using manually focus, and hit the button a carefully-timed split second before the wings are at an angle of 37 degrees and winding on between exposures, which I should set using my spot meter. But cheating is more fun...

Unfortunately at the moment I'm limited on my 5DMkiv to 7fps, partial AF area coverage, and an AF system that doesn't track very well. But I got some extremely nice BIF shots a couple of weeks ago in Brazil, and even got some very sharp and beautiful shots of butterflies in flight....

But even if I switch brands, I won't be selling my Canon gear. It would be daft to sell the lenses as they will AF well enough on a Sony body (although probably not as rapidly as Sony glass).

My Canon bodies are what secondhand retailers would describe as "well used" - i.e. absolutely perfect functionally, and they'll carry on working perfectly well for another 10 years, of that I'm absolutely certain. But they've both been subjected to heavy wear and extremely high shutter counts, so I'd only get a fraction of what they're worth.

why would anyone who own either camera be threatened by what another brand is doing? You have your camera, its a sony. Or, maybe its a canon. The other guy releases a new camera they are not going to come take yours away lol.

I honestly dont get any of this brand fighting stuff

What I do dislike, above all else, is biased reviews. I dont own any pentax, I have a canon, but I will defend pentax here on the boards on any review which I feel does not do their camera justice....which is literally every single one of them. The last thing the camera world wants is pentax to go under.

I’m now a Sony shooter again. I had the RP and it’s slow focusing and ability to lock on subject were awful. It’s video is crippled, poor battery life, and awful dynamic range. I did love the colors and high iso were great.

I had an A7RII and sold it a year ago. I had many mixed feelings about it. After now owning an A7III, all my negativity towards Sony has changed. They finally got spot on color, WB is great, eye AF is amazing, video is amazing. Body finally feels good to hold and buttons are much better. The update makes things even better.

At the end of the day, I don’t care what brand I shoot with. It’s all about what suits my shooting needs. We are all different and shoot different things. I have a bunch of Canon lenses that worked great on the RP, but it didn’t work out for my needs.

It sucks I had to go to Sony, but the A7III meets all my expectations and needs with ease.

I must say, that the A7 II is being listed here as MSRP 1700 USD, which isn't the case for a very long time by now. ;) It's 998 USD, for instance at Adorama, B&H should be the same, so is Amazon.

Its a way cheaper EOS RP Alternative as now "Entry Level FF" DSLM, also with IBIS, and better DR as the EOS RP. And all Lenses from the past 7 decades are by cheap adapters being useable, too. ;)

We do also have uncompressed 14bit RAW as a feature - something, the EOS RP for demanding tasks can't deliver - it's compressed, and that new CR3-RAW is somehow lossy, if one reads the technical specs hereby, therefore also the smaller Filesize(s) compared to the former CR2 RAW Format.

Just to clarify: it's included in the comparison because it's now cheaper but its MSRP is listed to make clear that it was originally meant to be a more expensive camera (though I was rather surprised, putting the comparison table together, how dated its specs now are).

I'd reiterate what we said in the text: anyone for whom the RP is a good fit will probably have a pretty miserable time with the a7 II. And vice versa, except that, in my own experience, anyone looking for a more involved camera would be better-off saving up for an a7 III, since it's much better than the a7 II.

I'd also suggest that Raw compression strategies are a red herring in this instance. Lossless compressed Raw (or even sensibly lossy compression) is usually preferable to uncompressed, which I'm pretty sure are the two options the EOS RP brings. But with these cameras it's the RP's sensor performance that's going to limit you in challenging situations, not the way its data is retained.

The EOS RP is "dated" into it's own way - 6D II Sensor, and some Websources also say, with less DR than the 6D II, YT or Webpost, read it some weeks ago somewhere.

2nd, the EOS RP doesn't have IBIS, and is only "good" by definition, because it does feature the RF mount, with the new, current RF lenses. Drop on a old, MF prime or Zoom, and the A7 II is really better, up to the task.

The RP also suffers into the Videomode. Many ppl, especially YT'ers have made reviews about that issue. And then the limited features, haptics and especially UI of the RP - sorry, but that's a Design for Entry Level Users.

I renew my statement from long ago, for 799 USD, the RP would be a hit, for 1299$ is really being over-priced, there are many (even older) DSLR/DSLM Bodies, which are way better than the EOS RP, albeit for much less.

Marc is right, the A7ii "dated" is relative. At the end probably the IQ still beats the RF, because of the dynamic range and the IBIS support. I have the A7Rii and I don't think is dated vs anything newer, still is able to great images.

marc - I don't think our positions are very far apart at all. I wrote that the RP is a collection of familiar components (it is the 6D II sensor, though I wouldn't expect a meaningful drop in DR).

I also agree that the RP's video (and its battery) specs are "pretty low by contemporary standards."

The a7 II's Raw performance will be better than the RP, especially in terms of dynamic range at low ISO (though you need to turn Sony's compression off if you plan to make use of that). When I say the a7 II looks dated, I mean compared with the Mk III: no touchscreen, no 4K, the old, too-small battery...

But yes, the RP has the much more beginner friendly UI (that's why I say RP users would hate the a7 II and vice versa).

We also clearly agree that the lack of affordable lenses means the RP isn't the bargain it's intended to be. But given it was already launched for $400 less than any full-frame camera before it, we'll have to disagree that it should have been 40% cheaper again.

Richard, these are the background thoughts about the RP, i've had. It doesn't mean it is a bad DSLM, but i do mean, for the target audience - especially at the given price point, these are not the usual buyers, which do collect & get "L" Series Canon Lenses, for example. Further, the Video feature, the neglible battery life, the old EVF into 2019 (i know, the A7II also got 2.36 MP, albeit being older) i just wanted to say that the IBIS feature (for manual focus lenses) is way important, further, nice you confirm it, the A7 II RAW performance *is* better than the EOS EP, especially with the uncompressed 14bit RAW Mode, a feature, the RP doesn't have - for mission critical demands, whereas IQ is really important.

Personally, i would pass on cams with a UI like the RP, it does look like a toy for my eyes, no offense. I do really think, the RP should be even more cheaper - Canon recycled the 6D II sensor, and some other tech, the Body isn't really al-mg, too...only the core inside.

@RedFox88 - No, A7II is not discontinued. Sony keeps older models in production but sells them at lower prices since their R&D costs have been recouped. For example, the A6000 is still in production, even though Sony has since introduced the A6300, A6500, and the recent A6400. Each one of these cameras sits at a different price point, and each one remains in production. The same applies to the A7, A7II, and A7III. They all remain in production but sit at different price points, allowing Sony to offer their cameras across a broad range of levels, specs, price points and technology.

T3 - The RX100 series (excluding the VI) might be a better example. The three models in the a6x00 series were always separated by price, not adjusted later to make room for the newer ones (a6400 directly replaces a6300, according to Sony).

marc - We completely agree about there being a mismatch between the RP and the lenses currently offered. Your concerns about UI very much reinforces what I mean about the RP and a7 II being suited to different groups of people (only one of which is likely to use MF adapted lenses).

I still don't see the appeal of uncompressed Raw over the 14-bit lossless compression that the RP offers, though. It has a lossy option, too, but you don't have to use it. The RP, a7 II and a7 III all have 2.36M dot OLED viewfinders, by the way.

Perhaps “MSRP” in the table should say “MSRP at launch”. Since “MAP” (Minimum Advertised Price) is now much lower on the A7II. As mentioned the A7II is still available, substantially cheaper than the RP. That should be clear but it’s not. Also would be interesting to identify the year of release as well in the table. The A7II was released more than 4 years ago...

Hi marc - You pointed out that the a7 II has the same viewfinder, but is older. I was just trying to highlight that the mark III still uses the same panel. I was trying to add to what you were saying, not contradict it.

It's all fine, i know. The A7 III should have had a 3.68 MP EVF, like the Z6/Z7, and hopefully, the A7 Mark IV Series would receive also a Top LCD Display. Still find this way useful, since my Contax 167mt.

Also, a "night" LED Mode for Buttons Backlight would being nice, or at least some LEDs, as the K-1 it already into 2016 featured, but illuminated buttons would be nicer, then. :)

About battery life, every camera into 2019 is better, than the Sigma DP Merrill series, sometimes, just after 15-25 RAW Files, the battery was being fully empty. :)

In the studio test scene I noticed that the EOS RP crops are noticeably sharper than the ones of the 6D II! Then I remembered the RF 50mm f1.2 is mounted on the RP. In the exposure latitude and iso invariance tests, the RP is as noisy as the 6D II but the blacks remain black because the general colours shift towards green. On the 6D II it’s towards red and thus blacks turn to red.

The problem with Canon is that it will take years for them to build out their RF lens line, and since it's a closed system they don't have the 3rd party support that the E-system has. If you truly believe "it's about the system and primarily the lenses", I'd rather go with the system that is already established and already has a ton of support from various parties.

@David Bo, I know, Sony is being busy the last few years. But I like Canon offerings way more. There 35-100 actually looks like it's going to deliver a MILC promise; smaller lenses. Also the Canon lenses (probably in combination with sensor/processor) produces way more pleasing pictures (to my eyes) than Sony lenses. I have full confidence that Canon will surpass Sony within 5 years in sales.

@Thorgrem - Canon is no longer the powerhouse it used to be. And Sony continues to move forward at a very fast pace. For example, Canon has 6 new RF lenses coming out in 2019. Sony has 12 new lenses coming out in 2019. Canon's body technology and sensor technology is also trailing behind Sony's as well. If this is the pace of development that Canon thinks will allow them to "surpass Sony within 5 years in sales", then I think you are partaking in very wishful and overly optimistic thinking.

"I have full confidence that Canon will surpass Sony within 5 years in sales."

You're tripping. Canon doesn't even have a BSI sensor. They have no chance of catching Sony in five years.

Just to address one aspect of your post about milc's promise of smaller lenses... The Panasonic 50/1.4 is 130mm long, has a 77mm filter thread and costs £2100. The Sony 50/1.4 is 100mm long, has a 72mm filter thread and costs £1500. Both lenses have nearly the same number of elements and special glass so are directly comparable.

Sony has singled out size as one of it's priorities. Most of it's products are the smallest on the market. The full frame Sony 100-400mm GM zoom is smaller than the Fuji aps-c one.

Thorgrem is a tripper alright. First off, Sony has never been ahead of Canon 'in sales' so that goal of surpassing Sony shall be easily met. Canon's clergymen are champions of low bar setting, no wonder they are always so amazed by 'achievements' such as the RP.

@Rubber please wake me up when Sony finally releases the sub-500 USD 35mm 1.8. Maybe in the year 2035. By the way, where is the list of the Sony 12 magnificent for 2019?

From Techradar.com:

"While Sony didn't announce anything new at Photokina 2018 (unless you count the new FE 24mm f/1.4 GM lens unveiled last week), it did reveal that we can expect to see a further 12 lenses in 2019..." sounds like nothing but a little smoke and some mirrors to me.

You do not need 100+ lenses. You only need the RIGHT lenses available. The RF50 1.2 is an amazing lens. The RF 70-200 2.8 will be incredibly good and portable and as soon as a wide zoom is available there is all I ever need. If I have to compare this setup to another system I could not care less about all other lenses available. They do not matter to me.

The only way to understand this camera is to realise that it started out on the designer's drawing board long before the A7III hit the market - and probably even before the A7rIII hit the market.

Canon has had no choice to present it at launch as a sort of FF rebel, but it's obvious they were aiming for the enthusiast's market and have had change direction mid-stream - that's why there's no budget kit lens at launch and none on the horizon. Canon isn't the sort of company that makes a body with no lens.

There is definitely a market for FF Rebel shooters. It may seem illogical that a novice would need the quality of a FF sensor, but in truth it's more about fashion - they know that most pros and serious amateurs favour FF, so it is seen as an essential.

I personally know 4 people who have bought the RP - 2 of them were upgrading from Rebel and 70D, another was an ex-Nikon D750 owner who has arthritis and wanted something small, light, versatile and with DSLR styling. The other one was a complete novice getting his first "serious" camera, and was swayed by the Canon brand name and the fact that his friends owned Canon DSLRs.

The price, the existence of a more overt a7 III competitor (EOS R) and the presence of scene modes on the mode dial suggest it's intended as a more basic model.

The provision of twin command dials confirms that Canon thinks that a 'FF Rebel' would be toward the more sophisticated end of things. Bear in mind that the 'Rebel' series stretches from the very basic all the way up to the 77D (the previous generation of which was branded with the 'R' word).

@Kandidthanks for your usual invaluable input. Btw, you would not know that I have a truckload of Canon glass waiting for a worthy Canon camera to be attached behind it, my 1DX is still waiting for a replacement. Who knows, maybe one day? Meantime these lenses are seeing a Sony camera adapted, what a shame.

Frankly it all comes down to taste for the Jpegs and software converter for RAW.

For Jpeg, I only like Canon color for a certain kind of portrait that that concentrate on flattering beauty (Canon colors is good for hiding the subject's flaws), althought that's a very popular type of portraiture.

But when your type of portraiture is to amplify the character then Sony colors is better because Sony color portray the subject realistically with every detail and sometimes amplify their features and their flaws (needless to say this is bad when your aim is to flatter). Sony also has some lenses with fantastic color rendition like the Sony Zeiss 50mm f1.4 planar that gives your photos a very filmic look.

Here's the thing thought: It's easy to remove details, but very hard to impossible to add in details that were never there.

For everything else, landscape, street, object. I don't like Canon colors at all and much prefer Sony. Canon tonality is too smooth for those thus not as punchy.

@armieFair enough......I got the impression yesterday at the UK photoshow that a strongly specified (expensive) R was on its way this year - it’s definitely up to Canon to respond to market leading products from their competitors......There is no reason to buy (IMHO) any of their ff mirrorless cameras if you are wanting to replace either a 5D4, 5DSR or 7D2.......(or, at the moment - and here is where we differ I think - anything from Sony or Nikon. If they don’t respond and Sony pull further ahead then that may change...). Pretty balanced for me don’t you think😊

*cont, that being said, Sony does need a better portrait creative style, better creative style customization, and smoother highlight roll off as Sony highlight can get really nasty in certain situation. (Seems to be solved with the A9)

For RAWs, depend on RAWs converter, I find the EOS R and A7III in C1 look almost exactly the same, using adobe standard profile in Lightroom they also look very similar.

@KandidFor me is a win-win situation. Canon makes a suitable Camera, that's great, otherwise I will keep it up with my Sonys which work great for me. I know Canon can make fantastic cameras, but its marketing strategy is just horrendously frustrating. Overpriced crippled bodies, who knows maybe they will pull the stops at some point when they are ready to give up DSLRs.

Carey and Richard, so you label a multitude of legitimate observations about the skewed tonality of EOS-R/P's skin color reproduction as "rumblings and grumblings about the color" and simply dismiss them with a highly scientific "whatever"? Way to test and review the camera!

Richard, a professional review should go beyond "I like" statements, shouldn't it? Since you are aware of the color shift concerns, why not address them with your usual charts and A/B comparisons, and let everyone decide for themselves whether they like the "new" look or not? Many DPreview members are still puzzled about the reasons for the perceived color difference in the RP and R. There is some speculation about possible changes to setting that you might have made when shooting your test photos, etc. Some people even reached out to the staff with questions about technical details of the tests. Why not address any of that?

Richard, come on... It is one thing to say, "Some people don't like the color in this camera, but we like it. Case closed." and quite another, "In our testing we have observed the shift to such and such color under such and such conditions in black, caucasian, and asian skin tones. Here are examples. We still like them, but we are aware that others don't."

I admire you Richard for being the one of the only people there who photographs people whose skin tone is not white, but you’re dead wrong about skin tones. They’re not a matter of taste. Skin derived its color from capillaries beneath the skin and one, sometimes two skin pigments. Consequently there are recognized formulas for evaluating skin tones; or even easier drop a photo onto a Premiere timeline and open up the vector scope. There’s a skin tone line—if the skin falls within a degree or two of that line it’s good. If not, bad. What could be simpler.On a related note, human color discrimination abilities vary throughout the day and with viewing conditions. Add to that the sizable portion of the male population which suffers from some form of color blindness and subjective judgments of color become completely useless.

Whether skin tones (or any colours) are accurately represented, and whether they are pleasing to look at are different matters. When Richard said that it's a matter of taste, he was clearly talking about the latter.

That's where you are both wrong. There is no "taste" in color reproduction. It is either right or wrong—especially with memory colors like human skin. The reason bad skin tones look OK to you is that your brain corrects the input hitting your retinas so that you see what you expect to see. You don't know you're looking at bad color because your brain isn't telling you. I realize it's hard to believe that the chromaticity you think you're seeing with your own two eyes doesn't reflect reality, but understanding human perception is crucial to becoming a better photographer.

SmilerGrogan, I've noticed that professional reviewers often exhibit certain nonchalance when it comes to color. I have been wondering if that is simply the product of the sheer number of images they look at on a daily basis and the resulting correcting/equalizing toll it takes on their color perception.

Right, there's no taste in colour reproduction, but there certainly is taste in respect to what pleases the eye. You can put two versions of the same image with different skin tone reproduction side-by-side, and clearly see a difference between them (meaning, the brain doesn't correct both so they look exactly the same), and it's still possible for a person to prefer the skin tone of the image that looks most "off" compared to what you'd expect to see.

"I realize it's hard to believe that the chromaticity you think you're seeing with your own two eyes doesn't reflect reality, but understanding human perception is crucial to becoming a better photographer."

It's not hard to believe. Not only don't the colours I see reflect reality, colours simply don't exist in the physical reality at all. We're really living in a virtual reality of sorts, created by the brain as a response to external stimuli. But all of that really has little to do with the point I was making about value judgments.

Canon must be congratulated for bringing mirrorless full frame at such an attractive price. In that sense they pipped all the other manufacturers to the post. Hopefully cheaper native lenses will follow shortly, as well as IBIS in a next iteration.

if I have to fly cheap with a FF I'd buy a used camera for a lot less. Or I spend a bit more for a lot more (i.e. A7III or A7RII). Either or it is not an attractive price in my opinion, but I am pretty sure it will be soon enough. As Toni pointed out A7 and A7II are cheaper and they are not really flying off the shelves, so I do not think the Canon RP will either at the current price point.

@mxx"There are reasons why this Canon will be a better buy for many people"I would correct "many" to "some".I agree that it is an interesting option for some, I do not see it for "many" until it drops well below the $1,000 mark.

@mxx - The EOS RP is basically old technology in a new plastic body shell. Technology-wise, it's really competing against a nearly 5 year old A7 II. And it's hobbled in certain ways, such as the low battery life compounded by the fact that the RP doesn't take a battery grip. (Typical Canon crippling of their cameras.) At least the A7 II's battery life can be extended by adding an inexpensive battery grip. The RP gets an extension grip with no provision for an additional battery.

That's what Canon was up against. Canon had no choice but to get the price as low as they could get it. They aren't doing it out of the goodness of their money-grubbing hearts, lol. So I don't think they need to be "congratulated" for a desperate act of pricing that was spurred on by how inexpensive Sony had ALREADY made their FF cameras! But of course, a fan boy will say, "Canon must be congratulated!" LOL, too funny.

People are not going to go online or in a store and buy a five year old camera over a new one in any significant number.New clothes, cars, cameras etc. outsell older models of the former by large number.

MyReality - Of course. Fashion and a desire to have the latest item are powerful drivers of camera purchases. We only have to look at the number of yet-to-be-released cameras that are on pre-order, to see that people will queue up to get something new, with little knowledge of how it will perform.

If you think Sony has a marvel by offering old cameras at a low price, you can buy a Canon 6D at around 600$. FF. You don't compate ancient to brans new even if they still have stock in sale. Just ridiculous. Plus it's an aweful camera, just read reviews. A Canon 6D or Nikon D610 is a MUCH better entry-level FF solution.

Don't feel so insecure because Canon is bringing the FF rebel to your market, feel happy as it pushes Sony to make you a streamlined A7III for 1299.

@MyReality - "People are not going to go online or in a store and buy a five year old camera over a new one in any significant number."

That is obviously a foolish statement. The A6000 still a top seller on Amazon. It was introduced in 2014. Likewise, the Sony A7 kit still sells well. It is currently the #19 best selling mirrorless camera at Amazon. The A7II is at #30. The EOS R is at #33. The RP is at #56.

Ebrahim - I agree that for a photo enthusiast who is currently using an APS DSLR, that the 6D, 6DMkii and D610 are all better choices.

But the RP is I think aimed primarily at a different market - novices, and those buying a "serious" camera after starting with a bridge camera or one of the cheaper M models.

These people would not be attracted by the bulk and perceived complexity of a DSLR. They just want a small, stylish, simple camera that produces higher image quality, and the RP fits that bill perfectly.

@entoman"These people would not be attracted by the bulk and perceived complexity of a DSLR"do you think such people would even understand why getting a FF? I get where you are going with this but in my opinion you are talking of an abysmal market share. Tony and Chelsea have a good video where they suggest that a stripped down FF camera (not what the RP is), with simpler (i.e. just internal memory and non removable battery etc) and more social media friendly with robust connectivity, should be priced closer to $500.

@entoman - "novices, and those buying a "serious" camera after starting with a bridge camera"

Most of those people would be moving to an APS-C DSLR or APS-C mirrorless body. Most bridge cameras have 1" sensors (or smaller) and no lens interchangeability. Moving to an APS-C DSLR would obviously give bridge users bigger sensors and lens interchangeability.

"or one of the cheaper M models."

There's no cross-compatibility between the EF-M and RF systems. Therefore the RF system is not an upgrade path for EF-M users.

T3 - I didn't say that moving from M to EF or RF was an "upgrade". It is a change of mount and a change to a different and more "serious" system.

Most people switching from a bridge camera to something with a larger sensor and an interchangeable lens, would in the past, have looked primarily at M43 or APS, because they would be used to a fairly lightweight and compact camera. The RP fits that bill, and also offers a larger sensor for about the same price, therefore it becomes an additional option for them.

However I think Canon have dropped a huge clanger by not having a compact, affordable kit-zoom available at launch for the RP, and that will deter a lot of buyers.

As noted in my response to Ebrahim, the camera I would personally recommend to novices looking to move from a compact megazoom to something "better", would be a Sony a6500, Pansonic G9, or a Fujifilm X-T30.

@T3 - Understand post fully before you post. First, #19 and #30 are not high rankings, second, the Canon R and RP have not been in the market since 2014 like the other cameras and third, not every buys from Amazon.Logic, will tell you that new outsells old many times over.

There you go again, banging on about shallow depth of field like it is the holy grail of photography. Not only is the technique a stale cliché, it is a sign of bad planning—it means the photographer was too lazy to find a background to suit the subject.

So can we please find a better reason to shoot with full-frame cameras because an embarrassing banality from 2001 just doesn't cut it.

Like any photographic effect shallow depth of field can be misused. But if used in the right way it can help provide beautiful pictures. I think there are many better reasons to diss full frame, like the high cost of bodies and extremely big and expensive lenses.

"Not only is the technique a stale cliché, it is a sign of bad planning—it means the photographer was too lazy to find a background to suit the subject."

That's complete nonsense. In the real world, many times you are limited to working with what is present in the immediate situation. That's true of street photography, wedding photography, photojournalism, and even location portrait photography. You can't always choose your background. Sometimes you have to work with whatever is there in that moment. The world is not a Sears portrait studio, LOL!

“You can't always choose your background”And there you have it, the self-defeating lie that is holding your photography back. You do choose your backgrounds, even just accepting what is there is choosing. So why would you settle for a bad, cluttered, too dark or too light background when you have an almost infinite number of dorections you can move. Floors and ceilings are usually very plain, that’s a matter of kneeling or standing on a chair. You can ask your subject to move over, you can bring a background. There is always a choice even when it means taking your subject somewhere else.

@RyanBoston - They struggle with it, because reality is too simple. It needs to be made complicated to impart it with more meaning, Shallow depth of field needs to have 3D POP for it to have validity for some photographers.

@SmilerGrogan - You've clearly never done wedding or event photography. In those situations, you are often quite limited in positioning your subject, and often limited in where you can locate yourself as well. And yet, you are still required to get great images, regardless of how bad or cluttered the background is. Sometimes, there are just people in the background that you want to be less distracting.

Agreed. If it had a Sony sensor and everything else was Canon (menus, ergonomics, color) I'd buy an RP even though I have no need for one.

That's the dilemma. Canon knows most of its SLR users don't really need a mirrorless camera and won't get better pictures from one. But if they can make mirrorless bodies cheap enough, SLR owners may pick one up for the small size, spare body, whatever. But obviously, it's cheaper for Canon to use their own sensor and not pay Sony $300.

armandido - Probably none of them. I had a couple of very early Sony cameras (a100 and a700) and the colours were indeed truly hideous and very difficult to correct in post. They were also incredibly noisy.

But Sony currently produce the best sensors in terms of sharpness, noise control and dynamic range - and while the JPEG colours are for most people not as "nice" as Canon JPEGs, they are quite OK, and it's easy to correct colour bias in LR.

If you prefer canon colors over Sony doesn’t mean you don’t like what Sony does.Sony has looked better and better over the years.I think it is a matter of personal taste.I like what my CL does but many dislike everything Leica.

I wouldn't have Canon colors, but I am perfectly ok with Sony colors. I will wait for Canon hi mp count camera and see the results. For the time being I am holding any expensive purchase to Sony. If such Canon body is good enough (for me), I may consider going back to Canon. If not, I will continue building my FE system and start selling the rest of my Canon EF gear. Most likely I will keep my 24II and 17 TSE glass tho.

@RyanBostonI am not sure what you are basing this on. Besides the fact that Raw can be whatever we like, the default look of an image from an A7RIII is very different from, to say, the A7RII, when you load a raw file in lightroom.

I’m touching many Canon bodies.They RP looks kinda too modern.Photography as such is now oldschool considering all the phone (and even tablet LOL) shooters.So a old school tool shoul look old school and feel old school IMHO.I like the look of Olympus and Fuji but a system change would cost me too much, there are no pro lenses on a budget like in the Canon system.I have the EOS M50 among DSLRs and it doesn’t feel like a photographic tool at all :(So I have to carry my heavy DSLR with me...

A few really nice images like the lady applying her makeup, some nice portraits too, but lots of terrible photos that are uninspiring. You’re reviews aren’t helpful with such bad photos accompanying them. There’s a million photographers in the Puget Sound - why not give some of them a chance? Most would do it for free just to be able to play with the new cameras.

These guys are doing as well as can be expected. Out of a gallery of 100 photos there are generally a dozen so that are good to great. My ratio of good to bad photos is about 1 good for every 10 bad which I think is average. Is your ratio any higher? Regardless, testing is about consistency. By seeing photos from the same people of the same general subjects you can tell the difference between cameras more easily. If you had a million different people shooting with the cameras every which way, you would never know if the difference you see is the camera or the photographer.

Bersshatsky - These galleries are there to help you assess noise, dynamic range, sharpness and bokeh - they are not intended to represent artistic or creative photography.

Instead of being so critical of the dpr staff, none of who are professional photographers, why don't you grab a completely untried camera yourself, and go out on the street for a couple of hours and see if you can do better!

@ Gianluca Grossi - the RAW converter is what gives you the (subjective) colors, you can make them whatever you want - the only difference is that a Sony sensor has better color depth and you have more to work with. Best of both worlds.

believe what u want...it cost nothing...)))...but different sensor, different processor lead to different output...it's not only raw converter....I developed many sony raw files and many canon raw files and for me the difference is obvious....

Sorry, but it's just the RAW converter. If you have not personally been able to get the files to match you simply aren't using the right profile. The RAW data is just that - RAW. What you do after that is what determines what the colors will be. That is not an opinion it is a fact.

The "Canon colors" thing is one of the most longstanding myths in the camera world, perpetuated by people who don't have a good understanding about RAW data. The main difference here is that the Sony sensors give you more leeway to tweak the colors precisely to your liking, which is the best of both worlds.

If someone were to say they prefer out-of-camera Canon JPEGs, that is to say they prefer Canon's RAW converter to brand B's RAW converter, which is totally fine, but does not mean that other cameras cannot produce the same or better result with the right profile.

justmeMn - Yes that's a justifiable comment. Canon really need to get a few budget RF lenses out quickly - 24-85mm F4 and 70-200mm F4 would be a good start. The only lens they have that is really suited to the small body of the RP is the 35mm F1.8 macro - a wonderful lens, but quite limited in purpose.

Not true either. Leave it on = native EF camera. There are Zero draw backs. Only positives. And then we haven't even considered the other two types of adapters yet.

The EOS R and RP currently have the biggest selection of native affordable to pro lenses in the history of the world. You can say a lot about the camera, but lacking lenses or that the adapter needs to be tolerated is not one of them.

Lobbamobba - I think the point being missed by some people is that although an adapted EF lens will work AF as well (on an EOS-R or RP) as a native RF lens, it won't AF as rapidly and decisively as if you mounted that same EF lens on a DSLR.

To check whether this was the case, I carried out 2 tests:

Firstly I checked my Canon 100mm macro, adapted and fitted to an EOS-RP. The AF was accurate, but definitely not as fast or decisive as when the same lens is mounted on my 5DS and 5DMkiv bodies.

Secondly I checked a friend's 24-105mm STM, adapted and fitted to his EOS-RP, and that too was slower and less decisive than when fitted to the 80D of another friend who was present.

The moral of this story, is that if you want maximum AF performance from an EOS-R or RP, you should buy the RF lenses that were designed for those cameras.

Not true. It not only works as good as on an EF camera, it will in fact work faster and more accurate.Again, lots can be said about the camera. But the availability of lenses is better than on any other camera through the existence of cameras.

It'll be a HUGE seller. HS classmate (who isn't the sharpest tool in the shed) makes money on the side in photography using the 6D (I think the first version). He has made some good images with it. He shoots concerts, HS sports (gets a pass to be on the field), families, HS grad pics; etc. I highly doubt he reads these websites.

"It's not a total waste of time. We get to see how behind this camera is."

While I don't think this Canon is quite as "behind" as many seem to think, even if it was, I don't understand why it shouldn't be reviewed. The idea that reviewers should dismiss some cameras as being bad beforehand, and only review the good ones, is very strange. A review is supposed to be helpful to consumers making buying decisions.

Yake, not Sony trolls, only aware people who see the limitations of à so called budget camera. I believe the future « cheap » Nikon will be a much better alternative . Also, many people do not understand why canon has not yet introduced cheaper lenses to match this « cheap » body.

@Yake - I bought one. It has IBIS, a great native lens selection, a solid magnesium body, and I bought a battery grip for it for under $50. The EOS RP doesn't have IBIS, has a plastic body, has a very limited native lens selection, doesn't accept a battery grip, and is more expensive! Who would buy an A7II over an EOS RP? Plenty. The A7II is currently #12 on Amazon's Best Sellers in Mirrorless Cameras list, while the EOS RP is #47:https://ibb.co/7SK99Y5https://ibb.co/7SvL5Pq

Pretty sad considering that the EOS RP is a new camera, and the A7II has already been in the market for several years! And yet the A7II is still outselling the EOS RP by a huge margin. Sadly, Canon's technology is competing against a nearly 5 year old camera, and they are still losing.

dansclic, It is a budget camera, not a so-called budget camera, and it can make great pics today. I too believe some *future* camera from some brand will be better, but future camera can't make pictures today. Canon offers plenty of cheap lenses that will work via adapter, so no big deal. Where is Sony's 35/1.8? Many people do not understand why Sony has no 35/1.8.

Neither is a perfect camera. The A7 II lacks low light performance in both IQ and AF. And the tracking is mediocre.

The Canon lacks speed, DR and maybe most importantly IBIS and a native lens selection.

In all honesty if you have a camera that works currently consider saving a little longer and going for an A7 III and getting an overall better camera or if you need to save a little go for a refurbished A7R II.

@Yake - A7II is working out perfectly fine for me, especially considering that it's nearly a 5 year old camera that can easily go toe to toe with the recently introduced EOS RP. No camera is perfect. Regarding any weaknesses that the A7II might have, its excuse is that it's a nearly 5 year old camera. Canon doesn't have that excuse with the EOS RP because it's a newly introduced camera!

I'd love to see Sony use their more recent mirrorless technology (especially their more recent Real Time Focus technology) and put it into a cheaper plastic body like the EOS RP and sell it at the same price as the RP. That body would easily be an RP killer, especially considering that the older A7II is already outselling the RP.

@Kandid - B&H does not have a true sales ranking list like Amazon does. But even if I did use whatever B&H offered, you still get two A7III listings ahead of the EOS RP. And the A7III has already been in the market for over a year!

And the A7II is nearly 5 years old! Is that what Canon is really competing against now? They are competing against 4+ year old Sony cameras that have long recouped all of their costs? Is that what has become of Canon?

@entoman - The average camera buyer is no different from the average consumer who looks up restaurant reviews on Yelp before deciding where to eat. People are not internet illiterate. People Google information before making a purchase decision. The EOS RP is not immune to that, and to imply that it is immune to that is naive and foolish.

T3 - "naive and foolish"? No, I don't think so, and using phrases like that does you no credit.

Yes, everyone is on the internet, but the internet generation is noted for its lack of patience, and most people skip very quickly from one site to another.

I don't believe for one second that the "average buyer" reads reviews on dpr or anywhere else. They might flick through the really simple reviews such as "Best cameras under $1000", but after that they rely on recommendations and on "playing" with cameras in a store for a few minutes.

This limited timespan attitude continues even after they buy the camera. Hardly anyone in the "novice" category reads instruction manuals because they don't have the patience to do so. They ask advice from friends, or look at a youtube video for their information.

@entoman - We live in an internet review culture. That's the reality. Everyone goes online to read reviews for everything from hotels, to restaurants, to products. Not many people walk into stores to "play with cameras" anymore. They read reviews, watch youtube videos, watch videos here on dpreview. And the "limited time span" argument is bunk because people consume this information on their phones while sitting on a bus, sitting on a train, while sitting in waiting room, while eating, etc. Your statement is amazingly out of touch with reality. For example, dpreview has exploded in popularity in the smartphone era. Youtube has exploded in the smartphone era. Everyone is on their phones, accessing information on the web from wherever they are. Then they place their order on Amazon and get it delivered to their door in two days. That's reality.

Your out-of-touch comments really make me wonder about your age, because you are clearly out of touch with the modern web/smartphone era.

T3 - If that's the case, I'd be surprised. Everyone I see on their smartphones is just skipping rapidly and randomly from site to site, but never spending more than a couple of minutes in any one place!

@entoman - Wow, are you creepy! So you're actually looking over people's shoulders, collecting this information and timing them, are you? LOL. You are definitely out of touch.

If you want to know how things are consumed, just look at dpreview, which is definitely much more in touch with the modern era and has the page-view data to back it up. They've organized their pages and videos to cater to how people consumer information these days. They know far more about this than you do. No wonder Amazon bought dpreview!

Like I said, it sounds like you're just a guy who is out of touch with how things work these days. You still think that most people walk into camera stores, and "take advice from a salesman"! LOL. Yeah...in 1991!

T3 - If you've ever used public transport, or indeed ever been outdoors, you'd know exactly what I mean - it's impossible *not* to see the way people flick rapidly from one website to another! Call it creepy if that gives you a thrill, but to me it's straightforward observation. I guess you just walk around with your eyes close!

Average Joe/Sally goes into Best Buy, canon is often their default brand. Pricey RP lenses are a huge issue now but otherwise a smaller affordable FF canon will sell well. Hardly do such people take test shots home or read many online reviews. Listen to customers at Best Buy it’s pretty shocking. Would be interesting to hear from someone who works retail. RP might turn off some people because they have “bigger is better” mentality!

It was an excellent design. I've always liked the a77 series and very nearly bought an a99ii a couple of years ago. There were 2 things that stopped me:

The failure of Sony to provide modern lenses in A-mount (e.g. no macro with internal focusing), and the fact that I would have had to run both Canon and Sony A-mount systems in parallel, in order to get all the lenses that I needed.

Carrying one camera system from country to country is bad enough, carrying two is beyond a joke :-)

I used the a77 for maybe 4 years and that articulating screen is the only thing I miss on the A9...

One of the best parts was you could flip it around to turn it off in a dark room and protect it from damage during transport... (of course you can turn off the LCD via a manu on the a9, but flipping the screen around was so intuitive...)

I was very disappointed that Sony didn't modernise the A-mount lens system. It put a lot of potential buyers off the A-mount cameras, which I've always liked a lot. The a7 series started out terrible (ergonomically) but they are getting better.

I'm holding out to see what comes first - Sony a7Riv with better ergonomics, or a pro-orientated camera in the Canon EOS-R series.

"Doesn't work any longer.""it takes an hour and 45 minutes to just to get my phone to cennect to the app every time i try to use the app."and so on.

And the point is not that tomorrow they will fix it, because the day after tomorrow the app will stop working again.

Picture geotagging is something that must be embedded built-in in the camera without any external dependency.I don't want to waste my time looking at my smartphone while travelling.I think the camera industry is sloppy about this feature.

Lol, the one thing holding Canon in the game is the $199 on sale DSLR cameras that parents buy for their kids hoping the kid will pick up a hobby instead of sitting in front of the computer playing Fortnite. The only good this does is that sometimes they actually make someone interested in "real" photography, but mostly it's just more plastic cr*p on the dump who nobody really wants. The camera shops are so full of almost new entry level DSLR's from Canikon that will never ever be sold or used and are just shipped back to the whole-seller.

You need to differentiate between what the small fraction of buyers that's registered on a forum online says, and what the majority of buyers who just walk into a store and buy a thing without ever providing a lengthy account of their decision making process online do.

I don't take 4K video. Yes, still, after so many years, I still take 1080p. And I don't need 4-5 stops shadow recovery. Never needed it. So RP looks fantastic to me. But Canon, please introduce a proper 24-105mm STM-like lens in RF mount. If RP+this new lens can be had for 1800 then this combo will be u beatable. I know there is 24-105mm L kit but that takes the price way above 2000 (2400, I think).Your needs may be different, and I respect that. So I expect Sony trolls to have some respect as well.

I feel the same about 4K, but recently trying to produce decent video from my 6DII I have kind of felt a bit let down. I would be happy with 'just' 1080 but GOOD 1080. To me my em10 mkII produces better and more detailed files. Its time Canon really pulled their finger out and produced a true hybrid camera. Something along the lines of a GH5 but FF and with DPAF would be an absolute home run...

"Upgrading" from my 7D Mark II to an RP would cost around $6,000 net and gain me just a tiny bit of performance in a few places in the performance envelope, while costing me some performance in other places. Plus, I'd have a poorer viewfinder and a slower shooting rate, and have to start giving Adobe $10 a month because Lightroom 6.14 can't process the RP's raw files.

Lightroom is why I bought a 5d4. The 5d4 has all the image quality I could want for years. I'm very pleased with it, apart from the iso control is not configurable to the thumb wheel as it was on my 5d classic, which is surprisingly annoying.

Why would you upgrade fully featured (APS-C) camera for basic entry level (full frame) one? That doesn't make any sense, no matter how big the sensor is. There's no point on saving some $$ on the cheapest body available. In your situation there's not much reason to upgrade right now, at most you can consider the EOS R, certainly not the RP.

One other thing I don't agree with you, the viewfinder. It will be better in terms of seeing what will be captured, all the extra information, much better low light visibility and better acuraccy of focusing in both AF and manual mode where it can be nicely magnified.

An R with a usable viewfinder (I haven't tried the R but the A7ii was unusable), with a full-frame sensor of 9600x6400 (equates to a 1.6-crop mode with 24MP), that will take EF-s and EF lenses and have a 1.6-crop mode, and the 24-70IS at $1,500 and the 24-240 for $600, all with 10fps shooting or better and with a built-in flash at a body+adapter cost of under $2,000.

Lee Jay - I don't know why you'd even consider an RP. It's a perfecly fine little camera (I've used one), but it's aimed at a *totally* different user than the 7DMkii.

Serious question - what subjects do you use your 7DMkii for?

Most people bought the 7DMkii as a sports or wildlife camera, and in its day it was excellent (I had one), but now it's seriously behind the pack in terms of image quality and AF performance.

Suggestions - If you want the best camera for sports, switch to Nikon D500, you won't be disappointed. If you want to keep your Canon lenses, get the 5DMkiv - it's by no means the best camera for sports, but it's pretty fast at 7fps and the image quality at ISO 3200 beats what the 7DMkii can produce at ISO 400.

I would like to ADD a FF body and a couple lenses to my APS-C kit, but an entry-level FF body certainly can't replace either my 7D II or 80D. Not in a hurry, I'm going to see what happens with pricing with the RP as well as the 6D II around the holidays.

@entomanI’m sorry I disagree with your assessment of the 7D2 - still a great performer for me. It would be nice to see an update in the offing however - but I feel we may have to wait a while - I can cope 👍

Kandid - The 7DMkii is indeed a great performer - within the limitations imposed by the sensor.

A lot obviously depends on how big you make prints, how much cropping you do, how much you sharpen the images, and how accurately you meter, all of which affects the level of luminance noise.

In bright sunlight I was happy with the 7DMkii at ISO 400, or ISO 800 if the background was busy enough to hide the noise. When low light levels dictated ISO 800 and the backgrounds were defocused, the noise was more than I could accept. I print to 20x16", view on a good 4K monitor and do a moderate amount of cropping.

A replacement for the 7DMkii is expected later this year. It is rumoured to be a hybrid between 80D and 7DMkii - in other words the build quality will be up to 7D standards, the sensor will probably be from the 80D, it will shoot at 10fps, and it will have an articulating screen.

Lee Jay's "upgrade" makes little sense. It's a full system change; the cost would be similar to any other camera brand. They don't need to exchange some of the lenses as that's what the adapter is for.

Then there's the confusing Sigma 18-35 + Canon 50mm = 28-70 F2. Adapt the 50mm, and settle for the 24-70 F2.8 RF when it comes out. You already seem willing to wait for the 70-200 RF anyway. $3000 can easily be shaved from their calculations.

ADDED:I should point out that going to Canon mirrorless, for any user, will be a full system change over time. However, there's no reason to dump that cost all up front when there are somewhat-temporary solutions that work well.

The reason I said I would exchange the 18-35/1.8 for the 28-70/2 instead of the 24-70/2.8 is because the later isn't really an upgrade - the effective speed is the same, with just a small amount of increase in range.

@Lee JayThen you've just set yourself up for massive disappointment. No matter where you look right now, no one will have what you want. There's also that you talk about "upgrading" your setup, and then you look to replace your 70-200 with the same focal length, and aperture... Yeah, time to reevaluate things.

Goodmeme - If rumours are true (chuckle chuckle), the next RF mount camera to be launched will be exactly that.

Most likely Canon will use existing tried and tested tech, i.e. they'll scale up the 24MP sensor from the 80D, which will result in a 62MP FF sensor.

Dynamic range and high ISO noise characteristics will be about the same as the 80D and 5DMkiv, which is good enough for almost anyone.

Burst speed is likely to be no faster than 4 or 5 fps, due to high processing overheads and underpowered chips.

The problem is IBIS. Whether or not it is actually *needed* is fairly irrelevant, but Canon must introduce it to maintain any credibility. Canon say that IBIS is still "under development", so I can't see it appearing for at least another year.

@entoman, Canon took a cautious approach with the last 5ds by splitting into 5ds and 5ds r.

Perhaps with this high megapixel release they will offer a dslr and mirorless with 62MP as you describe.

I think such a DSLR could plausibly hang around for decades, representing the zenith of the EF slr line, unlike the mirrorless variant which will inevitably benefit from developing evf tech etc.

I think IBIS would certainly help with such a high MP camera. Even with my 5d4 I am shooting at twice the speed I used to (without IS lenses), else the image will be slightly blurry at pixel level. Nevertheless such problems can be worked around with IS lenses or ISO for the most part.

Goodmeme - Canon have already strongly implied in interviews that they will not produce another DSLR to replace the 5DS.

There would be little point in increasing the MP of the camera with the current lenses, most of which were designed for lower MP cameras. The RF mount lenses are designed for higher MP cameras, so the new camera will be RF mirrorless.

Also to get sharp results handheld at higher MP counts, IBIS becomes a compulsory feature, and it would be difficult to put IBIS in a DSLR without making it significantly larger.

The need for stabilization is dependent on focal length, pixel count and sensor size, and we have plenty of systems that can take sharp shots at over 800mm equivalent and over 20MP without stabilization of any sort. A shot at 200mm and below would be fine at 16 times 20MP, which is 240MP, using the same settings. At 11, 14, 16, 24, 35mm and so forth, in many cases, it's just not an issue at all.

IBIS is NEVER compulsory, especially when optical stabilization is available and also work very well.

1) Yes of course the need for stabilisation is dependent on those factors (and others), but Panasonic, Olympus and Sony have already proven that you can get *more* stabilisation by combining IBIS and OIS than by using either method in isolation.

2) Many existing Canon lenses don't have OIS (e.g. 180mm macro). Many future Canon lenses will also lack OIS. Lenses without OIS are cheaper and lighter. So there is a need for IBIS to stabilise these lenses.

3) If Canon wants to keep its market share, it has no choice but to incorporate IBIS, because regardless of your own views, the vast majority of buyers *demand* IBIS.

No one in their right mind would choose a camera without IBIS if an otherwise identical camera *with* IBIS was available.

I guess, but there are so many lenses with OIS that it just doesn't seem to be a problem. Personally, I have 16mm equivalent to 960mm equivalent covered seamlessly with OIS. Only three of my lenses lack it, and one of them couldn't be stabilized with IBIS either.

Lee Jay - Actually I sold one of my favourite lenses - the gorgeous Canon 180mm macro, simply because it was unstabilised and difficult to get sharp enough images, even with a low res camera like the 5DMkiii.

I've even considered (heaven forbid) getting a stabilised Sony body, and buying another copy of the lens....

Nothing from Sigma or Tamron can touch the image quality of the Canon 180mm, but I simply couldn't get sharp enough hand-held images with it unless I shot at 1/500 or higher (which obviously limited me to wide apertures and/or high ISO, neither of which are a good idea for macro work).

@Lee JayOkay, sure, I say nonsense because we began with nonsense. If the argument for the 70-200 was to have a native mount lens, fine, I've already covered that. But that was never your argument. Your roundabout method of "upgrading" two lenses with one extremely unique lens, and daring to call the only option inadequate, is the major issue though. Like I said, you've set yourself up for disappointment. The issue isn't the market, it's you.

So, thanks for the entertainment. There's zero merit in me taking you seriously on this topic.

@Lee JayOkay, then what are your other options for the 28-70 F2? There are none. What are you going to do, settle with an F2.8 lens?

Look here, there's nothing wrong with saying, "I wish X would be more affordable". However, picking out the ONLY option, and then lambasting it, is just being ungrateful. If another lens manufacturer had a 28-70 F2 for, like, $2000 USD then, sure, it'd be legitimate to criticize Canon's $2999 USD price to some extent. So, yeah, your argument of saying that it's too expensive to upgrade is still flimsy as ever.

Just get the F2.8 glass, and probably save $700 (I bet Canon's will be $2200-2300 USD). Keep the 50 F1.8, and enjoy the benefits that full frame provide for it.

And you still haven't even provided an argument for the 70-200. You say that I don't "understand things" for your reasoning, yet, you still don't provide a reason. What's the upgrade here? Don't rely on being vague. Write it out. If you've got nothing, I've saved you $$$$.

The reason to exchange 70-200 is that the new one is so much smaller that it would enable me to carry another lens in the same bag. That's the same reason I want a built in flash - so I can carry another lens instead of a 580EX. Most of the time, the on camera flash is just fine for a little pop of fill or adding a catch light so the extra lens is way more useful.

@Lee JayYour argument, for the 70-200, would have worked if your previous one, for the sake of upgrading, didn't contradict it. The 28-70 F2 isn't smaller than the Sigma 18-35 F1.8 + Canon 50mm F1.8. Also, the new Canon 70-200 isn't likely going to be much lighter in weight at all, and then you want to add more weight on top of it. You're just setting yourself up for potential shoulder injury if you wear your bag during your shoots (I have no idea how you operate but your mention of flash does not suggest a studio).

Canon's EOS RP is the company's latest entry-level full-frame camera, and it happens to be mirrorless. The company's previous entry-level full framer was the EOS 6D Mark II, and so we decided to take a look at how they stack up for different types of photography.

Canon's EOS RP may be small on the outside, but it's hiding a big 26MP full-frame sensor on the inside. We've been pushing forward with our full review and have updated our gallery with fresh shots, and have taken a look at how how it handles our studio test scene – see for yourself.

The EOS RP is Canon's second full frame mirrorless camera, built around the new RF mount, and comes with an aggressive launch price of $1300. While there are some inevitable compromises to be made at this cost, Chris and Jordan discovered that there's a lot to like about this pint-sized full-framer.

Latest in-depth reviews

360 photos and video can be very useful for certain applications (as well as having fun). The Vuze+ is an affordable 360 camera that supports both 2D and 3D (stereo vision) capture, and might be the best option for someone wanting to experiment with the 360 format.

The Mikme Pocket is a portable wireless mic with particular appeal to smartphone users looking to up their game and improve the quality of recorded audio without the cost or complexity or traditional equipment.

The 90D is essentially the DSLR version of the EOS M6 Mark II mirrorless camera that was introduced alongside it. Like the M6 II, it features a 32MP sensor, Dual Pixel AF, fast burst shooting and 4K/30p video capture. It will be available mid-September.

The S1H is a full frame mirrorless camera designed with videographers in mind and includes advanced features like 6K video capture, 4:2:2 10-bit internal recording, improved video scopes, high frame rate recording, Panasonic Varicam color science and more.

Latest buying guides

If you want a compact camera that produces great quality photos without the hassle of changing lenses, there are plenty of choices available for every budget. Read on to find out which portable enthusiast compacts are our favorites.

Whether you're hitting the beach in the Northern Hemisphere or the ski slopes in the Southern, a rugged compact camera makes a great companion. In this buying guide we've taken a look at nine current models and chosen our favorites.

What's the best camera for under $500? These entry level cameras should be easy to use, offer good image quality and easily connect with a smartphone for sharing. In this buying guide we've rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing less than $500 and recommended the best.

If you're looking for a high-quality camera, you don't need to spend a ton of cash, nor do you need to buy the latest and greatest new product on the market. In our latest buying guide we've selected some cameras that while they're a bit older, still offer a lot of bang for the buck.

Whether you're new to the Micro Four Thirds system or a seasoned veteran, there are plenty of lenses available for you. We've used pretty much all of them, and in this guide we're giving your our recommendations for the best MFT lenses for various situations.

Blackmagic has announced an update to Blackmagic RAW that adds support, via plugins, to Adobe Premiere Pro and Avid Media Composer. Blackmagic also announced a pair of Video Assist 12G monitor-recorders with brighter HDR displays, USB-C recording and more.

Sony has announced the impending arrival of its next-generation video camera system, the FX9. The full-frame E-mount system is set to be released later this year with a 16-35mm E-mount lens to follow in spring 2020.

The Canon G5 X Mark II earns a Silver Award with its very good image quality, flexibility and the overall engaging experience of using the camera. However, if you need the very best in autofocus and video, other options may suit you better. Find out all the details in our full G5 X II review.

The Fujifilm X-A7 is the newest addition to the company's X-series lineup. Despite its relatively low price of $700 (with lens), Fujifilm didn't skimp on features. Click through to find out what you need to know about the X-A7.

The entry-level Fujifilm X-A7 improves upon many of its predecessor's weak points, including a zippier processor, an upgraded user experience and 4K/30p video capture. It goes on sale October 24th for $700 with a 15-45mm F3.5-5.6 kit lens.

Robert Frank's unconventional approach to photography and filmmaking defied generational constraints and inspired some of the most influential artists of the 20th century. He passed away today at age 94.

All three devices offer a standard 12MP camera plus, for the first time on an iPhone, an ultra-wide 13mm camera module. The 11 Pro and 11 Pro Max also retain the telephoto camera of previous generations.

Phase One's new XT camera system incorporates the company's IQ4 series of digital backs with up to 151MP of resolution and marries them to a line of Rodenstock lenses using the new XT camera body. The result is an impressively small package for one of the largest image sensors currently on the market - take a closer look here.

Phase One has announced its new XT camera system, which includes an IQ4 digital back, body (made up of a shutter release button and two dials) and a trio of Rodenstock lenses. The company is marketing the XT as a 'travel-friendly' product for landscape photographers.